HomeAbout UsContact UsHistory and Trail PhotosLinks and Case Law

PALM CITY FARMS:
ONE OF THE MANY PRE LAND BOOM OF THE 1920's  Subdivisions
About 13 1/2 square miles of Florida swamp in Palm Beach County was subdivided in 1916 into 10 acre parcels. Land owned by the Company closer to the River was also subdivided but into small lots. The sales deal was buy 10 acres in the Farms and get a free lot in town. A very good book "The History of Martin County" has been published by the Historical Society. Many pictures of the people and the buildings are included with dates. Tours were made by horse drawn wagons and later by one of the first autos in what became Martin County in 1925. Because the land was swamp a drainage district was formed by the Company in 1919 and drainage ditches were constructed along some of the platted and dedicated roadways as well as across many of the parcels. The hurricane of 1928 filled many of the ditches and destroyed most of the sand roadways. The plat of the land is unique in several ways. It dedicated the roadways to the public but with a lengthy saved and reserved clause. This clause appears to be a part of the plan for the drainage district. The mandated life of the drainage district would have ended Halloween 1969. Before that date the sole surviving trustee of the Company filed a series of recorded Deeds and Releases that purport to release the Company rights to the underlying landowners with easements to all other owners. Much research has been done and we are now ready to proceed to regain our right to use the platted unopened right of ways in addition to the open roads.
1. Many of the miles of roadways are unpaved though each year more are paved by the landowners. These provide access to homes as well as part of the Trail system. There are about 70 miles of these designated roadways that are unfit for vehicular traffic but make excellent hiking, mountain bicycling, or horse back riding Trails.
Trail Asssociation Efforts
2. Of the many miles of roadways not made into roads some have always been used as Trails but some were fenced off and taken into the abutting landowners holdings. We have been working to get these back into service as Trails.
We have developed a Passport Map that will be e-mailed to you as a new member.  
Examples of many of our trails are shown here.
Busch St: A 1 mile connector for Busch to SW 84th Ave.
SW 66th Ave. between SW 33rd St. and Gator Trail, Ignore the "Utility Access Only" sign. A disgruntled attempt. This trail was regained as private rights after the abutting owners of the south half of the quarter mile got the County to approve an abandonment of the public rights. The law suit and the mediated agreement are recorded and can be read by looking up OR  Book 02415 Page 1107-1110 4 pages. Use the links for the Martin County Public Records
SW 72 Ave. to SW Moore 
Crossing the Ditch at SW 72 Ave. and SW 33rd St. .also on Google Earth
A portion of SW 42 St between Leighton Farms Rd. and SW 42nd Ave. was abandoned by the county. Before the Board of County Commissioners approved the Resolution an intervention to save the public trail resulted in a new easement being approved by the parties seeking the abandonment. There is now a trail that (though it needs some work to be easily used) extends from SW 42 Ave to Leighton Farms Rd. The first picture is from Leighton Farms Rd. The trail is the ditch bank. The second shows the abandoned portion. The third shows the trail from the SW 42 Ave. end. See the plat pictures:the trail is highlighted as blue. The recorded easement agreement assuring the perpetual use of this new trail was recorded 12/28/2005 in Book 02096 Page 2762.

Blasko Lane is a linear park that was created by the re-plat of a portion of the Farms west of Berry Ave AKA 27th Ave. The developer agreed to build a landscaped park and donated some land to make the old plat Right of Way wider. The plat ROW is still there just alongside the Martin County strip. The public has the use of the entire strip from SW Sunset Trace to SW Martin Downs Blvd. The first is the plat area. the next three show the Parkway. The last is the replat: the tiny looking strip that opens onto Sunset and Martin Downs Blvd is the old plat ROW.
Re-plat of part of Palm City Farms for high density development.
The current use of the space dedicated in 1916.
Aerial showing the area of the old plat right of way that was preserved as a public park and walkway.

SW BOATRAMP AVENUE TRAIL 
The Naked Lady Ranch has apparently conceded the County has the authority to allow the development of this important public trail. The Trail Association is now cooperating with the County to properly develop the trail by installing crossings at hazardous ditches and clearing brush from the path.

Progress is being made on development of this 1 mile extension of the SW Boatramp Ave. trail. The pictures show the pass through installed at SW Moore St., the nearly complete culvert just north of SW Woodham St., the proposed bridge for the SW Quail Hollow ditch crossing, and the rope barricade at the runway of the Naked Lady Airport runway.


In the beginning there was a fence in the way.
A section of the unpermitted fence was removed and a pass-through was installed.
42 inch pipe in place and work beginning.
Nearly Complete Fabric in place awaiting filling of the last few inches.
Quail Hollow Ditch where bridge will be needed.
A very clean design of a bridge crossing a private ditch of the same dimensions as most ditches in Palm City Farms.
This design is being approved by a professional engineer so that appplications for the required Martin County permits can be completed.
To mark the right of way where it crosses the runway of Naked Lady Ranch Airport a rope marker is installed.
Progress will be reported here as the Trail is prepared for an official dedication .
EXCUSE LIST: TAKING OF RIGHT OF WAYS HAS BECOME AN ART FORM SO MAKE UP SOME NEW EXCUSES THESE LISTED BELOW ARE ACTUAL EXCUSES USED WE HAVE NUMBER THEM AND PEOPLE WILL ONLY NEED TO QUOTE A NUMBER SOME ARE REAL GEMS ALL ARE MYTHS OR LIES.
We are now on the "search for the truth" so if you or your capable attorney finds any of these to be true AND A LEGAL REASON FOR TAKING THE PUBLIC DOMAIN OR THE PRIVATE RIGHTS OF ALL THE LANDOWNERS we sure would like to hear about it.

No. 8 is a favored claim of certain attorneys who are attempting to keep the taken roadways for their clients.
Click here to go to the history segment below to see one piece of evidence that their road is indeed going to be difficult.


This listing is of actual excuses or reasons given for the disappearance of the right of ways.

1.This land has been in our family for years.

2.I have had this gate here for the last 40 years.

3.I have squatter's rights to this old paper right of way.

4.I own to the middle of the road right of way. And: My attorney told me that we own to the middle of the right of way.

5.This is an unopened right of way.

6.These are only utility right of ways.

7.I had to close this off to secure my property, after all I have many thousands of dollars worth of equipment and plants here.

8.The County never accepted this portion of the right of way so it reverted to the underlying landowners years ago.

9.The developer made this road into a cul-de-sac and that made the old right of way end right here.

10.When they made this 72nd Drive and deeded the land for it to the County the County gave this old right of ways to owners of the land that had lost footage to the new street.

11.The Palm Beach County Land Company (the original plat developer) held the right of ways until they were finally Quit Claimed in 1969 to the underlying landowners.

12.These right of ways reverted to the underlying landowners when the County failed to make them into roads by November of 1972.

13.This fence has been here more than four years so I now have possession of the right of way.

14.I fenced the whole right of way because my neighbor didn't want his 15 ft.: too much trouble to keep it cleared.

15.I own the properties on each side of the right of way so I can close it; after all no one needs to go through there to get to their land.

16.When the Turnpike went in the authorities abandoned and closed all the right of ways that were crossed by it up to the next road.

17.I have a right to graze my cattle on all the land enclosed by my fence.

18.The 15 ft. boundary right of way ceased to exist when the land next to it never dedicated the other land to make it a road.

19.As part of the development of the Naked Lady Ranch Airport the County gave the old paper right of ways that ran through there to the Company so they could put in the landing strips and our own private streets. As a matter of fact there were a couple of them abandoned officially by the County before this plan was developed.

20.When the County accepted our streets they abandoned the old right of ways that were there so we could have these nice wide and paved streets without the County having to do anything to all the other old right of ways out here.

21.When I saw that neighbors were fencing in and gating off the old right of ways I just  assumed that it was OK for us to claim our part of the old right of way system that had never been used.

22.I fenced this off to keep 4 wheeler and other trespassers out of here.

23.The rest of the people that own land back in there don't need this right of way to get to their land else there would be complaints.

24.I had to fence in my cattle that way else I would have had the whole pasture chopped up into 5 & 10 acre fenced plots and would have been moving cattle around all the time.

25.I put up that fence and gate and locked it to protect the wetlands back there.

26.When the Interstate went in the old right of ways on both sides were eliminated.

27.All the old right of ways that were used for drainage ditches by the Palm City Drainage District were converted to drainage ditches only, not roadways anymore. Go down  and look at Boatramp south of Moore and you will see that there is no longer a road there even though it existed at one time on the east side of that ditch. (Wrong side the road was on the west side of the ditch).

28.I had to fence this off to keep people out because of the liability of some one getting hurt in there.

29.The people going through here were just stirring up dust and making noise that I don't  want.

30.The County Sheriffs can't stop people from going through here so I did.

31.My bedroom is so close to that easement that if I allowed people to go through there I wouldn't be able to sleep.

32.I asked the County to put up a fence like they did at Boatramp and Moore St. to keep traffic out of here and they refused so I put it up. I guess they didn't want to spend the money out here.

33.We filed a document in the County Records to tell everyone that Sand Trail was private now and that the public couldn't use it anymore.

34.Back in 1972 the county closed all these old right of ways as part of the new growth  management regulations.

35.This right of way was closed by a County Road Closure Order because of the health and safety concerns from the water level in the ditch along side the road.

36.You don't own any property back in there so you don't need to go through there.

37.I had a gate there for a long time but nobody used it so I just fenced it off.

38.I can't let people go through there the barn was built on the right of way.


AND ON AND ON IT GOES:
GOT NEW ONES SEND THEM TO THE WEB SITE VIA THE COMMENT MESSAGE CENTER ON THE "CONTACT US" PAGE
TO TELL THE TRUTH:

The truth is that parcel owners in the Farms do hold a fee simple title absolute to the parcel originally shown bounded by the roadways of the plat. For nine years the grantor company held as saved, reserved, and retained the title to the roadways. Further until September 26th 1969 the Palm City Drainage District in the name of the company held a right to build drainage ditches across the parcels: this right was released by recorded documents to the underlying parcel owners. When all parcels were sold by January 1 1925 a fee simple underlying title was created by construction of the Smith v Horn Supreme Court decision. The underlying title is encumbered by the public and private rights to an easement that is appurtenant to all the deeds in the Farms. The plat was accepted and this vested the public rights. The private rights were vested by the purchase of the parcels. Once a plat is accepted by public use or government acts of acceptance the underlying title lies dormant until the superior rights of the easement are legally removed. Once the public rights are removed the private rights become vulnerable to adverse possession; another legal process. The roadways shown on plat Book 6 Page 42 bound the parcels with unnamed and unlabeled spaces, the deeds to the parcels sold by parcel number, the grantor saved, reserved, and retained the roadways for nine years until all parcels were sold, then per Smith v Horn the title extended to the center of the roadways subject to the public and private easement. An easement to the grid work of roadways shown on the entire plat. Acceptance of any part constitutes acceptance of all. No revocation of the offer to dedicate has been found. All current transfers are still according to the plat. See the slide diagram below.
 
An interesting early case, in 1911 legal jargon was a bit different:
There were many claims but these two seemed most appropriate for the point that once accepted a plat is irrevocable and it does not matter what is done with or to the land it endures whether used or not just waiting for a proper use. In those days the developer  opened the streets not the county commission. Once accepted by user or acts of the county the public rights can be enforced for the public. Adverse possession is not possible.

THE CLAIMS:
6th. Your orator would further show unto your Honor, that the said lines marked and indicated upon said map as said Hill, Line, Bay and Sweetbriar Streets, have never in fact, been dedicated as streets; that said lines indicated as streets have never been accepted by the defendant city of Gainesville, as streets -- that said lines so indicating streets, have never been used by the public or the city of Gainesville, defendant herein, as streets; that the same have always ben owned, used, occupied [***6] enjoyed and possessed [**782] by the owners of the lots of the said Hill & Lassiter Addition, for their own convenience and pleasure.

13th. Your orator would [***12] further show, that the said city of Gainesville, as aforesaid, has never accepted said pretended streets, or recognized the same in any way, either by any official declaration of its municipal body, or by the use of same by the public, and the same are of no interest, or no benefit whatever to the defendant city, or the public, as they simply enter into and extend out of the entire property of your orator.

THE COURT RULING
CITY OF GAINESVILLE V. THOMAS SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA, Division A
61 Fla. 538; 54 So. 780; 1911 Fla. LEXIS 493 January 1911

The complainant can acquire no equity by the expenditure of money in beautifying the premises. Before making the expenditure, it was open to him, as well as the city, to inquire into the title to these streets, and property dedicated for a public highway does not become private property because an individual may from his viewpoint, deem it to the best interest to the public, to so divest it, however laudable the motive may be.

We do not understand that the city threatens to do aught else than to keep open as public streets, property theretofore dedicated for that purpose which is now accepted. It has done no affirmative act, which under any reasonable application of the doctrine of equitable estoppel as applied to a municipality, destroys its positive duty to keep open the thoroughfares which it accepts, to the full enjoyment of the general public.

The complainant seeks the aid of a court of equity to protect him in his encroachment upon a public right, he fails to show in himself title to these "streets" and the demurrer should have been sustained.


IT APPEARS THAT REPLACEMENT OF THE WORD MUNICIPALITY WITH COUNTY OR CITY IS ALLOWED UNDER THE LAW. THIS RULING THOUGH ENHANCED BY LATER CASES HAS NOT BEEN WITHDRAWN OR OVERTURNED.
 

BERTHA K. SMITH, Plaintiff in Error, v. C. L. HORN, Defendant in Error SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA 70 Fla. 484; 70 So. 435; 1915 Fla. LEXIS 292 December 10, 1915

When Miami Bank, Sterling's predecessor in title, dedicated the platted roads "to the perpetual use of the public for proper purposes," it explicitly reserved to itself any reversionary interest, as against the public. Thereafter, all the lots in the plat were sold; and the deeds described the lots by reference to the plat. Because there was no mention of any reversionary interest in these transactions, the present case falls under the rule stated in Smith v. Horn [**11] , 70 Fla. 484, 70 So. 435, 436 (1915): 


Where the owner of land has it surveyed, mapped, and platted, showing subdivisions thereof, with spaces for intervening streets or other highways between the subdivisions clearly indicated upon the map or plat, and conveyances in fee of the subdivisions are made with reference to such map or plat, the owner thereby evinces an intention to dedicate an easement in the streets or other highways to the public use as such, the title to the land under the street remaining in the owner or his grantees; and, where such conveyances are made with reference to the map or plat, the dedication of the easement for street purposes cannot be subsequently revoked as against the grantees, and the title of the grantees of subdivisions abutting on such streets, in the absence of a contrary showing, extends to the center of such highway, subject to the public easement. And, where the highway is lawfully surrendered, the then holder of the title to abutting property and to the center of the street has the property relieved of the public easement.


Many Rulings have Passed By Since: They all deal with extensions or clarifications of the early laws and rulings.

To interpret old plats the laws before Jun 11, 1925 must be understood Number: AGO 78-88 is the Florida Attorney General’s Opinion that says so.

Charles Curtis Chillingworth Richard Jolley Chillingworth

Charles Curtis Chillingworth was born at Liverpool, New York, 12 May 1868. He came to the shores of Lake Worth in April 1892, having graduated from Cornell University in New York in 1890. He was admitted to the Florida bar at Titusville, the following year. He opened a law office in Juno, then the county seat of Dade County, as a partner in the firm of Robbins, Graham and Chillingworth.
Charles' father, Richard Jolley Chillingworth, was born in England 30 November 1833 and arrived in the Oswego area of New York at age one. He married Eunice Ann Bettinger in 1865 and they followed their son to Florida in 1892. Richard served as sheriff of Dade County from 1896 to 1901. He and Eunice lived in West Palm Beach.
Charles moved his office to West Palm Beach in 1905 and became the town's first attorney. He also served Lantana in the same capacity. His home was on the site of the Harvey Building (Datura and Olive).
Charles married first Annie Seabrook Whaley who died in childbirth. Their son, Walter Seabrook Chillingworth, was born 20 August 1893. He served in the Navy, attended Cornell University and was graduated from Ben Franklin University. He married Flora Genella Marks and they were living in Washington, D.C. in 1937.
Charles married second on 9 November 1895 Jennie Dietz of Liverpool, New York. Children by this marriage were Curtis Eugene born 1896 at West Palm Beach, Margarita, born 1899 at Atlanta (married Loren D. Simon, an attorney) and Richard C., born 1902 at West Palm Beach, also an attorney. He and his brother-in-law were partners in the law firm of Chillingworth & Simon. Richard was a graduate of Cumberland University and married Rosemary Whitaker.
Curtis Eugene Chillingworth graduated University of Florida and was admitted to the Florida bar in 1917. He married Marjorie McKinley of White Plains, New York. Trajedy struck the Chillingworth family in June 1955 when Curtis and Marjorie were abducted from their weekend home on Ocean Boulevard in Manalapan. They were taken to sea and drowned by two killers hired by a former West Palm Beach municipal judge.
Charles was an active and interested member of Lake Worth Pioneers' Association. He was one of the founders of the Harmonia Lodge of Masons, Palm Beach County Bar Association, Palm Beach Yacht Club, Utopia Club, Chamber of Commerce, Woodlawn Cemetery, Good Samaritan Hospital and belonged to the country club and other organizations. He retired from his law practice in 1925 and died 25 October 1936.

Copyright 2007 Lake Worth Pioneers' Association, Inc. All Rights Reserved.


This 1 mile Trail is shown as two segments since a culvert or bridge is needed at the Quail Hollow Crossing. The ditch at Quail Hollow is shallow enough to cross on horseback. A depth quage shows the water depth.
Currently a crossing is available as a permissive use to travel the Quail Hollow Trail. Please respect the private property and carefully negotiate the by-pass.
Limited parking is available alongside Boatramp Ave to the north of the guardrail shown. This is the north end of the trail which starts behind the caution signs.
The crossing referenced to transfer to the Quail Hollow Trail.
Depth guage is visible as a six inch wide board with foot marks just visible on the right of center. The trail is clearly visible but the water is deeper on either side of the visible trail.
THE BOATRAMP AVE TRAIL IS 1 MILE AND RUNS FROM WOODHAM TO MOORE STREETS WITH AN INTERSECTION AT QUAIL HOLLOW.  A DITCH CROSSING IS REQUIRED TO TRAVERS THE ENTIRE LENGTH ON FOOT OR TO CROSS TO THE QUAIL HOLLOW TRAIL.
MOORE STREET TO QUAIL HOLLOW 1/2 MILE OFF ROAD TRAIL
Woodham entrance parking is limited alongside Woodham to the east of the ditch (right of this photo).
Looking East at Ranchito future Trail. Survey markers are in at the Boatramp ditch bank and the road is visible in the background. The owners of the property taking the ROW must be convinced to return the ROW.
Quail Hollow Crossing is just north of clump of brush past birdhouse.
WOODHAM STREET TO QUAIL HOLLOW 1/2 MILE OFF ROAD TRAIL
THIS 1/4 MILE CONNECTOR BETWEEN 33RD STREET AND GATOR TRAIL WAS RECOVERED FROM BEING ABANDONED OFFICIALLY BY THE COUNTY. A LEGAL INTERVENTION PROTECTED THE PRIVATE RIGHTS AND THIS IS A TRAIL TODAY BECAUSE OF THIS UNFORTUNATE AND EXPENSIVE ENDEAVOR.
ENTRANCE OFF 33RD STREET
PERMISSIVE GATE PASS THROUGH ON THE LEFT.
LOOKING SOUTH AT PASS THROUGH NEXT TO PERMISSIVE GATE.
ARRIVE AT GATOR TRAIL
66TH AVENUE FROM 33 RD STREET TO GATOR TRAIL
33RD STREET FROM CANOPY CREEK TRAIL TO 84TH AKA DUMP ROAD
CENTER OF CANOPY CREEK TRAIL SOUTH
WEST TO BOATRAMP AND CROSS ONTO 33
NORTH ON CANOPY CREEK TRAIL
APPROACHING 66
APPROACHING 72 DITCH
NEED A BRIDGE OR CULVERT?
OVERGROWN RAMP
72ND AVE TRAIL ON OTHER SIDE
33 AT BETCHA RANCH ON RIGHT
APPROACHING 75 AND THE OBSTRUCTION
VIEW OF 33 WHERE ADVERSELY OBSTRUCTED BUT NOT ADVERSELY POSSESSED
33 WEST AT CARMINE CURSIO GATES MUST REMAIN OPEN
33 AS OBSTRUCTED ADVERSELY BUT NOT ADVERSELY POSSESSED EAST OF 78TH AVE
PRIVATE DRIVE TO DURHAM'S ON HOLLEY LANE AT 33 CROSSING
EAST ON 33 GRASS IS TOUGH
SOUTH ON HOLLEY LANE A PERMISSIVE USE TRAIL
33 STREET ACROSS MR HOLLEY'S LAWN?
ENTRANCE TO COUNTESS JOY FOREST
NORTH ALONG TRAIL  AT DUMP ROAD WATCH WIRE
SOUTH AT TRAIL ALONG DUMP ROAD
84 AVE OR DUMP ROAD POLES MARK THE ROW
GATOR TRAIL: FROM CANOPY CREEK TO 84TH AVE (DUMP ROAD) 2 MILES. THIS TRAIL WAS ONE OF THREE SELECTED AND RECOMMENDED BY THE MARTIN COUNTY GREENWAYS AND TRAILS COMMITTEE SEVERAL YEARS AGO WHEN IT WAS ACTIVE. A FEW OBSTRUCTIONISTS ARE ADAMANT THAT THEY OWN THE ROW THUS REQUIRING LEGAL ACTION TO ANSWER THE QUESTION. WORK CAN CONTINUE ON THOSE SEGMENTS NOT IN CONTROVERSY. THE CROSSING OF THE DITCH IS HIGH PRIORITY.
CENTER OF CANOPY CREEK TRAIL LOOKING WEST AT BOATRAMP CROSS ONTO GATOR
66 AVE TRAIL ON LEFT
END OF PAVED PORTION OF GATOR. 72 DITCH AHEAD.
GATOR TRAIL CONTINUES ON WEST SIDE OF DITCH. 72 AVE TRAIL ON THE OTHER SIDE.
ACROSS THE DITCH LOOKING EAST BACK AT GATOR THE STREET
ROW MARKER AT THE BIG BLACK POST. 30 FT ROW IS TO THE POST. 72 AVE TRAIL ON THE LEFT JUST OVER THE COUNTESS JOY FENCE FIRST OBSTRUCTION.
ON THE ROW HEADED WEST MUCH CLEARING REQUIRED WHEN RECOVERED
LOOKING BACK EAST @ POND BUILT ON ROW  WILL REQUIRE BYPASS OR SOME WORK WHEN AND IF RECOVERED BY COURT CASE FENCE IS CORRECT BUT THE ENTIRE ROW IS TAKEN BY SOUTH PROPERTY
THE TRAIL IS CLEAR SAILING BOTH EAST AND WEST OF THE POND WHEN RECOVERED
OFF SET FENCE SHOWS COUNTESS JOY FENCE ON LEFT AS OK.  FENCE IN FOREGROUND IS IN CENTER OF THE ROW. SURVEY MONUMENT OF CENTER IS INTACT AND VISIBLE AS A STAKE VERY NEAR THE CROSS FENCE LINE LOOKING EAST
GATE IS ACROSS THE ROW
ROUND PEN IS ACROSS THE ROW
BARRICADE AND ROUND PEN FENCE LOOKING EAST FROM 78 AVE
GATOR CONTINUE WEST UNOBSTRUCTED FOR ABOUT 350 FEET THEN
THE CORRAL IS ENCOUNTERED ACROSS THE ROW AT TWO POINTS BY JOINING THE COUNTESS JOY FENCE WHICH IS OK HERE
WOVEN WIRE FENCE TAKES PART OF THE NEIGHBORS LAND BUT IT IS OK?  SINCE THE OWNER IS ABSENTEE IN CANADA?
THE CENTER OF GATOR TRAIL IS THE STAKE IN THE WATER. THIS VIEW LOOKING SOUTH AT THE CORRECT COUNTESS JOY FENCE
OUT OF THE JUNGLE WITH A ROAD IN VIEW NURSERY ON LEFT IS COOPERATIVE AND FRIENDLY AND HAVE NOT TAKEN THE ROW
GATOR TRAIL AS A ROAD TO DUMP ROAD NURSERY PROPERTY ON THE LEFT
THIS TRAIL IS A VERY IMPORTANY PART OF OUR TRAIL SYSTEM BECAUSE IT REQUIRED CONSIDERABLE EFFORT TO KEEP. THE PART OF THE TRAIL AT SW 42 AVE WAS UP FOR AN OFFICIAL ABANDONMENT AND WE NEGOTIATED FOR THE TRAIL ASSOCIATION WITH THE OWNERS ASKING FOR THE ABANDONMENT AND THE COUNTY. FOLLOWING SEVERAL ROUNDS IT WAS AGREED THAT THE OWNERS WOULD SWAP THE OLD UNUSED ROW FOR AN OFFICIALLY OPENED PUBLIC ROAD AND A SMALL CONNECTING EASEMENT TO GET TO THE BANK OF THE DRAINAGE DITCH FOR AN EXTENSION OF THE TRAIL TO LEIGHTON FARMS ROAD. THE PARCEL OWNED BY THE HALL'S WA RESOLD AFTER THE ABANDONMENT AND THE AYCOCK 10 ACRES BECAME MARTIN COUNTY PROPERTY AND IS NOW BEING DEVELOPED INTO A LAKE / SAND MINE. CONSIDERABLE WORK IS ALREADY DONE ON THIS TRAIL BUT SOME REMAINS. THE INITIAL ENTRANCE HAS BEEN SURVEYED AND STAKED BUT NOT TOTALLY CLEARED AND IT APPEARS THE CLEARING MAY NOT BE ON THE PUBLIC SIDE OF THE ROW, THE LEIGHTON FARMS ROAD END IS TRICKY BECAUSE OF THE TALL GRASS AND THE NEED TO NEGOTIATE THE STEEP BANK ONTO THE ROAD. CROSSINGS AT THE DRAINAGE FACILITIES OUT OF THE SAND MINE ARE NOT COMPLETE AND NEED TO BE UNDERSTOOD.
History and the Development of Regulations and Laws for Palm City and Palm City Farms as platted May 11, 1912 in Book 2 Page 24, re-plat February 17th 1916 in Book 6 Pages 41 & 42 of Palm Beach County (now Martin).

There was HISTORY prior to FLORIDA that applies. Examples: 

Under the 1785 act, section 16 of each township was set aside for school purposes, and as such was often called the school section. This played out with Section 16 being sold by the State and therefore becoming a part of the Farms.

Editorial Comment: The roadways and trails in the Town of Palm City and the Farms Community have been in public use for so many years that it is amazing that anyone could claim the plat was never accepted especially a land attorney.

Treaty of 1821 with Spain acquired “Florida” (Federal Statutes Ann. Vol. 7, p. 810)

1845, March 3 Acts of Congress U.S. Stats. at large, Vol. 5, p. 742 Approved “Florida’s admission to the Union.

1853 May 16 BA Putnam Acting Surveyor General State of Florida approved surveys of 1845 and 1851 for township 38 S of Range 40 East most of the land in the Farms.

1874, February 19 Chapter 1998 LAWS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA CREATED DADE COUNTY

1886: Charles Curtis Chillingworth born at Liverpool New York 12 May 1886.

1889: George Beckwith (NYC) bought the land where Palm City lies today.

1892: CC Chillingworth moved to Lake Worth in April and opened a law office in Juno, his Remington typewriter was the first in Dade County.

1894: WINTER VS. PAYNE Supreme Court of Florida 33 Fla. 470; 15 So. 211; 1894 Fla. LEXIS 143    January, 1894. Old history case about fences etc. Establishes the view in the years just before PBCLC platted the Town and the Farms. Best description of  the ruling is in KIRKLAND  v. CITY OF TAMPA SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA 75 Fla. 271; 78 So. 17; 1918 Then Smith v. Horn SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA 70 Fla. 484; 70 So. 435; 1915  follows to further define plat rulings before the new laws of June 11, 1925. Peninsular Point, Inc. v. South Georgia Dairy Co-op, Inc., No. O-137, Court of Appeals of Florida, First District, 251 So. 2d 690; 1971 Fla. App. LEXIS 6193, August 24, 1971 does a good job of further interpreting the cases above. Even Attorney General’s Opinions champion the rulings Number: AGO 78-88 Date: June 15, 1978 Speaks specifically to reservation in plats being part of the deeds.

1905:  CC moves to West Palm Beach and becomes the town attorney.

1909, April 30 Chapter 5970 LAWS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA CREATED PALM BEACH COUNTY

July 6, 1909 Only one application received by the Board for the position of Attorney to the Board, this being the application of Mr. C. C. Chillingworth, and on motion of Mr. Rousseau, seconded by Mr. Fiblack, Mr. Chillingworth was nominated to be Attorney for the Board. Motion carried unanimously.

The Tropical Sun newspaper was selected as the official organ for the County of Palm Beach.
1.103 BCC MINUTES of West Palm Beach Friday Jan., 7th, 1910 meeting.
Pursuant to adjournment the Board of County Commissioners met at 2 o’clock PM with all members and officers present. Dated January 6th 1910, is a payment schedule listing items for payment with CC Chillingworth being paid $75.63 for Salary and Sundries the phone company got $6.00.

1910:  Claim in “Celebrating 100 Years” that CC bought the 12,000 acres. 
Truth probably is this: August 10, 1910 a contract to purchase 12,133.06 acres according to the United States survey by Section number and Government lot number by a Mortgage Agreement for $1.91 and ¼ cents per acre was signed by J M Barrs, C C Chillingworth witnessed by Dexter Hunter Jr. and M B Higgenbotham and recorded at  Bk. and Pgs. 4.44,45,46,47,48 of Palm Beach County Records.

The newspapers, Palm Beach County Records, testimonials of pioneer owners all prove that the roadway sytem was in use from the begenning if not before and that though the struggle to get funding and build the extensive roadway system is incomplete even today it has been going on since the ferry was landing at Palmetto Drive and tours of the Town and the Farms were conducted to sell the land. Public use is sufficient alone to prove the plat was accepted. Yet in the case of this haunted subdivision the Governmental Bodies have been messing with the roadway system since Road and Bridge District No.4 encompassed the land under Palm Beach County then later by Palm City Special Road and Bridge District still under Palm Beach County and even Martin County after its formation. This newspaper clipping should be sufficient to cause any attorney claiming the plat was never accepted to reconsider their chances of winning this argument.

72 AVE AND PART OF MOORE: THIS IS ONE OF THE EARLIEST TRAILS RECOVERED AND SAVED FROM BEING POSSESSED. ATTEMPTS WERE BEING MADE TO FENCE THE TRAIL OFF NEGOTIATIONS RECOVERED IT FROM MOORE TO 72 THEN ON NORTH ALONG 72 WITH THE SOUTH BRANCH OF 72 STILL BEING OBSTRUCTED. A ROAD OPENING PERMIT THREATENED TO CLOSE OFF MOORE TO 72 BUT A TIMELY INTERVENTION AT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONER HEARING MANAGED TO PREVENT THE PERMIT BEING GRANTED AND GIVING THE PERMIT HOLDER AN EXCUSE FOR CLOSING OFF THE ROW. THE SOUTH SEGMENT OF 72 TO WIDELIA STAYED BLOCKED UNTIL NEGOTIATION AND UNDERSTANDING FINALLY LED TO THE OWNER OF THE PROPERT BLOCKING IT INSTALLING A PASS THROUGH AND RETURNING THE ROW.
OPEN ROAD PORTION HEADED SOUTH ON 72 AVE OFF RATTLESNAKE RUN
ENTER THE TRAIL
CORNER OF 72 AND 48TH (MOORE) LOOKING WEST ROW STILL OBSTRUCTED ITS 15 FT WIDE ON THIS SEGMENT AND RUNS 1/2 MILE WEST TO 78TH ACONTINUING SOUTH ON 72VE
CONTINUING SOUTH ON 72
LOOKING EAST ON MOOREMOVING ON SOUTH ON 72
MOVING ON SOUTH ON 72
THAT WAS A LITTLE ROUGH BUT GREE GRASS AHEAD
OUT OF THE BRUSH HEADED FOR THAT PASS THROUGH AT WIDELIA STAY RIGHT OF THE POWER POLES
LOOPING BACK NORTH 25 FT TOP THE WEST ON A PERMISSIVE TRAIL ALONG THE RANCH FENCE
BACK ON THE MOORE TRAIL HEADED EAST
MOORE STREET WHERE AN OPEN ROAD THE PROPERTY ON THE LEFT WAS THE ONE GOING TO CLOSE IT OFF THEY ARE OK NOW
Cherokee AKA SW 78th Street End Westward to Boatramp Trail
Start of the Trail is the End of the roadway portion of Cherokee Street
Historic Pass Through to get on the Greenridge Easement
Looking North at Greenridge Easement ROW is to the right in the Bushes
Trail depicted on Google Earth starts at Highway 714 and travels north to Busch Street  a 1 mile trail. Crosses 33rd Street and Gator Trail then Bessie Creek.
Negotiating Bessie Creek and the wet land may be a bit much for some!
714 Trail branching to left West
714 trail branching to right between the bollards and around the telophone switch gear East
North on the trail approaching a gate which was once a problem but is now open and there is a pass through next to it just in case!
33rd Street junction: a bridge or culvert is needed though the county has not seen fit to approve a permit as of this date. Indemnity insurance for the county is the excuse.
33rd Street trail west to 75th Ave
 72 Ave north of Highway 714 passing 33rd St Gator Trail crossing Bessie Creek and connecting to Busch Street
First trail crossing is the Highway 714 trail followed by 33rd Street
Continuing on North past Gator Trail to Bessie Creek normal water depth less than One foot.
Private Bridge Ahead wonder about the Insurance on this one?
A little wildlife in the duck weed.
Gator Trail Crossed here.
Clearing work required to remove pepper trees for about 200 ft.
Permissive easement the last 600 ft to Busch. Future work may result in trail in woods to the west (left).
Busch Street Trail entrance on right of gate.
Going get a lot rougher once across the Creek the large wet land can be crossed in extreme dry season.